Trump and Russia

[Ken]

Yes, I don't see Trump as a mediator. The only role I can see him in is that of rebuke, something like this. "Looky here Mr. Putin. What you are doing to the Ukrainians is really nasty. Let them alone and go back home. Quit killing all these people. If you don't..."

"if you don't?......what? "I'm going to call up President Biden and ask him to send more weapons or implement more sanctions?"

Does Trump speak for the Biden Administration now?

We have had ex-presidents engage in actual diplomacy and negotiations in the past. Jimmy Carter comes to mind. But I fail to see how that is something within Trump's skill set. Especially as he is hardly a neutral party here based on both his words and deeds. And he has hardly sought to carve out a role for himself as a distinguished ex-president. He still seems to do little more than obsess about his loss.

[temporal1]

[Jess77]

Trump was a cheerleader for Russia's invasion back in February on the eve of the invasion. He was actually encouraging Russia to invade. Here are his own words on the eve of the invasion.

The notion that Trump would have prevented this war is beyond absurd. He supported it.

Not only is that audio very clearly edited, but it is also from Politico a known adversary of the Right.

Taken in context, what Trump was acknowledging was that Putin is very smart in the way he operates. This does not mean that Trump agreed with what Putin did. This world likes to conflate craftiness and intellect with moral right or wrong. To acknowledge that someone has done something that from their perspective is ingenious, does not mean that you are in agreement with the action, purpose, or outcome.

[Jess77]

Now methinks that if Trump is so influential, perhaps he could be given some role to get Putin to leave Ukraine.
If you agree, picture what this role would look like and what types of bipartisan cooperation might be needed in order make such a role actually take place.

To answer your question directly, I don't think there is much Trump could do to negotiate peace between Ukraine and Russia as long as the Biden administration is in power. Trump's biggest advantages when dealing with dictators especially are his cunning intellect and unpredictability. Neither one of those will do much without the power to back them up.

[Jess77]

To me, Trump seems to have a very hard time standing up to Putin, even though he boasts about doing so. And he has covered up for Putin over and over again. Trump has had business dealings with Putin and shady dealings in Ukraine. I'm trying to imagine why anyone would choose Trump for this role.

I quote myself from another thread:

It was Zelensky who was President of Ukraine when Trump suggested he might want to look into the Hunter Biden situation, a call for which he was eventually impeached. And it was the Russian puppet president Poroshenko who Biden threatened to withhold $1Biliion from if the prosecutor looking into Hunter Biden's connection with the Ukranian energy company Barisma wasn't immediately fired... which he was. It seems as though it is in the Biden family's best interest for Russia to be in power over Ukraine.

[temporal1]

Not only is that audio very clearly edited, but it is also from Politico a known adversary of the Right.

Taken in context, what Trump was acknowledging was that Putin is very smart in the way he operates.

This does not mean that Trump agreed with what Putin did.

This world likes to conflate craftiness and intellect with moral right or wrong.
To acknowledge that someone has done something that from their perspective is ingenious, does not mean that you are in agreement with the action, purpose, or outcome.

Good wording. ^^

i wrote:
Trump is an international businessman. A pragmatist.

A business pragmatist, not a political ideologue.
DJT did+said many good things (100% buried). Not regarding Russia/Ukraine, alone.

Yesterday, i was thinking of how he (graciously) offered National Guard support to Seattle/2020, literally on fire for months.
The response was hateful, partisan.

In my view, whether they wanted help or not, the response could have been and should have been, in gratitude.

His SOTU speeches were very good.
Pelosi exploited them for political grandstanding. She did not apologize.
One of the most shameful displays in U.S. history.

i had no “skin in the game” for DJT. i was surprised as any he was elected. i braced for nuclear war (as instructed).

DJT turned out to be a pretty good president. Give credit where credit is due. Admit error.

[Bootstrap]

To me, Trump seems to have a very hard time standing up to Putin, even though he boasts about doing so. And he has covered up for Putin over and over again. Trump has had business dealings with Putin and shady dealings in Ukraine. I'm trying to imagine why anyone would choose Trump for this role.

I quote myself from another thread:

It was Zelensky who was President of Ukraine when Trump suggested he might want to look into the Hunter Biden situation, a call for which he was eventually impeached.

I don't think so. That would have been perfectly legal.

According to the Articles of Impeachment, Trump was impeached for withholding military aid to Ukraine, in order to pressure them to make announcements to help his presidential campaign. During a presidential election, he wanted Zelensky to announce investigations into Hunter Biden, and also into claims that Ukraine interfered in the 2016 election and Russia did not. In fact, he didn't ask Zelensky to actually do an investigation, he merely asked him to announce that he was doing these investigations, during a presidential election, in order to help his campaign. Trump did not want a quiet investigation that would have taken time, ending after the election was over, he wanted a public announcement when it would help his campaign.

That seems pro-Russia and anti-Ukraine to me. And to many officials who served in the Trump Administration - Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland, and the former National Security Council official Fiona Hill all testified against him in the impeachment.

Trump repeatedly tweeted this claim that it was Ukraine that interfered in 2016, on behalf of Clinton. He covered up for Russia. He weakened NATO and spoke ill of the European Union, Germany, and France, but never seemed to have that kind of criticism for Russia or Putin.

And it was the Russian puppet president Poroshenko who Biden threatened to withhold $1Biliion from if the prosecutor looking into Hunter Biden's connection with the Ukranian energy company Barisma wasn't immediately fired... which he was. It seems as though it is in the Biden family's best interest for Russia to be in power over Ukraine.

And yet, the Biden Administration worked hard to get aid to Ukraine, and also to bring NATO and the European Union together. Trump withheld aid that Congress had already allocated and consistently spoke against Ukraine. (I also think you got your facts a little wrong, I think this is accurate: https://www.factcheck.org/2019/09/trump ... d-ukraine/)

[Grace]

And yet, the Biden Administration worked hard to get aid to Ukraine, and also to bring NATO and the European Union together.

Did you ever hear the phrase "one hand washes the other". Is the Ukraine aid a pay off for silence from Zelensky on the Biden Family's corrupt connection to businesses in Ukraine?

It is interesting that Zelensky ordered all data regarding Metabiota along with the other companies involved between the Biden's & Ukraine be destroyed Feb 22, 2022.

[Josh]

Yes, Hunter Biden got paid $50,000 a month as a "consultant" for a Ukrainian company, but nope, nothing to see here.